I'm not feeling confident about our safety with these autonomous aka driverless cars on the roads if it ever happens.

But here's a example of exactly how these things either don't work or go wrong. A Tesla motorcar ran into the back of a ooje US bright red and chrome fire tender.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-42801772
A Tesla smidsy. But what chance have bikers got if it can't see an ooje red fire truck?

There's another story around about a biker who got hit by a driverless GM car who is reportedly suing GM fir damages. How can the police do a car for causing an accident?

"Car-makers suggest self-drive technologies should make the roads safer, but at present California requires a driver to remain behind the wheel so they can retake control at short notice."

That says it all, really, by the time the "driver" realises that an accident is about to happen and reacts to take back control, it will be too late! No, driverless cars are not a good idea, in any shape or form.

The more intelligent the car, the dumber the driver, I see it everyday. Clowns behind steering wheels relying on technology to do the simple things that they can't even cope with, like staying in lane, approaching a stationary object without seeing it!
If a driver can't park the car, they shouldn't be on the road... simple!

"Car-makers suggest self-drive technologies should make the roads safer, but at present California requires a driver to remain behind the wheel so they can retake control at short notice."

That says it all, really, by the time the "driver" realises that an accident is about to happen and reacts to take back control, it will be too late! No, driverless cars are not a good idea, in any shape or form.

More like by the time the dozy bugger either wakes up, or like most of the US population gets off their phone or I pad.

The thing is driverless cars work great IF all vehicles on the road are driverless and connected. As soon as you add in Human free thought then things become less predictable and accidents will happen.

I think a human sat in a driverless car ready to take control is the worst of both worlds - they will be too slow to react to actually stop most emergencies and being a human less easy to 2nd guess for other autonomous vehicles

Reading online the discussions about the interaction between driverless cars and bikes it appears that the organisations driving this agenda say that because X amount of bikers die every year in RTAs then driverless vehicles will be much safer for bikers.
3 + 5 = 2 is what they are saying.

I totally agree that having a person in the car who can take over is nonsense. That person would have to be a fully trained driver which negates the whole purpose of having driverless cars.

Reading online the discussions about the interaction between driverless cars and bikes it appears that the organisations driving this agenda say that because X amount of bikers die every year in RTAs then driverless vehicles will be much safer for bikers.
3 + 5 = 2 is what they are saying.

That argument can't possibly hold water, there are 2 or 3 driverless cars on the road at the moment causing 1 biker accident, multiply that 2 or 3 by the
amount of cars on the road, then, statistically, after a couple of days there won't be a biker left alive!

In respect of developments on our planet and in the solar system ref to solar radiation and EMF pulses with a very weak magnetosphere and compromised ozone layer all of us and electric vehicles are subject to damage and failure due to these large potential problems. We have just been very lucky so far.
I cannot understand why the government and scientists are pushing the electric vehicle agenda when at the same time we are being warned about the risks to the grid and individual electric pieces of equipment from phenomena out there.

Would earth's magnetic pole reversal make these things inoperable? Seeing as scientists are saying it's back on the cards.

For the same reasons I can't understand that now EMF weapons are the ultimate war weapon, why the hell is the MOD building two multi billion pound electric aircraft carriers. A kinda guaranteed fail.

Those are rhetorical questions but relevant to the whole electric autonomous vehicle situation.

More like by the time the dozy bugger either wakes up, or like most of the US population gets off their phone or I pad.

Like they do here as well. I was sat in heavy traffic in town yesterday and I was watching the driver of the car behind in the rear view mirror. It was very obvious the driver was using a phone or a tablet by their eye movement and she was looking down right until I moved off. It happens a lot.

Reading about the Chevy Bolt vs Bike crash it looks like the car tried to change lane, got half way over found gap was closing and aborted the manoeuvre, in the meantime a bike had moved into the gap it was leaving and thus despite a person in the car trying to grab the wheel to stop it, the car sideswiped the bike into a barrier

Reading about the Chevy Bolt vs Bike crash it looks like the car tried to change lane, got half way over found gap was closing and aborted the manoeuvre, in the meantime a bike had moved into the gap it was leaving and thus despite a person in the car trying to grab the wheel to stop it, the car sideswiped the bike into a barrier

That's the one I've seen.
It will be an interesting test case and GM are blaming the biker. But considering the human in the car quickly realised what was happening and reacted clearly shows the auto pilot was defective in not seeing the situation until it hit the biker.

Its a new energy drive system that produces more power than what is put into it.
NASA revealed it last year then google hid the news for a while.
The new drive is some kind of particle drive and uses electricity and magnetism.
NASA said that if they could make a spaceship with this drive system then it would reach Mars in about 30 days. NASA are going flat out to make it into a spaceship. The Chinese have the same technology.

I think this was was made by a scientist, but I know what you mean about back engineering. My partner has seen the big black triangle here where we live.
I think that's possibly a black project military job.

It seems that UFO's have changed shape since the 'flying Saucer' days and oddly follow (maybe 15 years behind) the current crop of stealth fighter/bombers in use by NATO. Which probably means the triangle is a secret MOD aircraft that has not been revealed to the public (and hopefully the enemy).

It seems that UFO's have changed shape since the 'flying Saucer' days and oddly follow (maybe 15 years behind) the current crop of stealth fighter/bombers in use by NATO. Which probably means the triangle is a secret MOD aircraft that has not been revealed to the public (and hopefully the enemy).

I suspect the big black triangle is what is known as black military project. What Gary McKinnon alluded to from his hacking experiences. According to "Janes" which is the catalogue of all world aircraft, the black triangle is the most talked about and still the most secret air craft..
Its a regular sighting all over the world and I don't believe the military don't know what it is.
One was reported over a suburb of Birmingham last week and it's claimed to be over 300m or feet maybe long. It's silent and has the ability to be or go invisible. Technology which the military already has. As for the fact it is silent and can hover or very slowly move I'm not sure about what keeps it up or propels it.
Some ufo sightings of white lights are in fact the three solid white lights one on each corner of the triangle.
Although it has been seen with a deep red or purple light in between all three white lights or the centre of the triangle in other words.

Some say it's a Lockheed craft a TR3b or from "skunk works" but its all just guesswork. No one knows.
A senior Tory mp a few years ago had one hovering over his house in the middle of the night. I will try and find the article.

We've seen some very strange UFOs from our house. It's impossible to say if they are military or not. But they are nothing like anything we've ever seen before. We aren't bothered or frightened but some people might be. Especially when one flew in very slow and low right over our heads in the back garden and then accelerated off again. Just came to have a look at us. But it totally defied any logic. Quite surreal.

Getting back to the EM drive..It amazes me as to how "scientists" scoff at new ideas that defie the known laws of physics. Laws that were based on a 300 year old scientist's findingsi.e Newton. Time marches on so does technology (usually egged on by a war or two!) so why shouldn't this EM drive not work? Just because the "scientists" do not understand it at the moment, but time will explain it. If it works now then develop it! Sadly it will be fro military purposes first, inevitably! We may scoff at Star Trek Technology but what have we now? Voice activated computer software, mobile comunicators - telephones/PDAs! The only real onw that defies description at the moment is teleportation. no doubt in time this will be cracked. But I don't think I'd like to be deconstrusted, whizzed to anotherpoint and then reconstructed somehow! My brain gets fried enough as it is!